SURESH KUMAR MATHUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short question which arises for determination in this writ petition relates to the seniority of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondents Nos. 2 to 50.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the petitioner was appointed as a temporary lower division clerk (hereinafter called 'l. D. C. ') in the Rajasthan Secretariate by the order dated July 28, 1965 on his passing the Junior Diploma Course, but the appointment order dated July 28, 1965 specified that the petitioner would be substantively appointed on a permanent post of L. D. C. falling vacant. THE petitioner continued to hold the post of L. D. C. in the Rajasthan Secretariate until he came to be confirmed on the said post by the order of the State Government dated July 28, 1971. Respondents Nos. 2 to 50 were also confirmed on the posts of L. D. C. by the very same order dated July 28, 1971.

(3.) THE question of seniority amongst the cadre of L. D. Cs. has to be resolved in accordance with the provisions of Rule 28, which lays down that seniority in each class of posts shall be determined by the date of the order of substantive appointment to that class of posts. Proviso 9 to the aforesaid rule, which was added by the notification dated August 27, 1962 further lays down that L. D. Cs. recruited from amongst those who have passed the Junior Diploma Course shall rank senior to those recruited through the agency of the Commission in any particular year. As initially these were only two sources of recruitment to the posts of L. D. Cs. from amongst those who have passed the Junior Diploma Course and those who were recruited after selection by the Commission, proviso 9 clearly indicated the manner in which the seniority between those who have passed the Junior Diploma Course and those who were appointed through the agency of the Commission would be determined. At the time when a new source of recruitment was provided by the addition of proviso (2) (i) rule 7 to the Rules, no provision was made in respect of determination of seniority of such persons who were made permanent under proviso (2) (i) of rule 7. In order to clarify the position in this respect the State Government issued a circular order on October 8, 1969 in which it was laid down that persons who have passed the Junior Diploma Course would be considered as senior to those who were appointed on selection by the Commission in each year, and after 19-8-1968, persons who were made permanent on account of the amendment of proviso (2) (i) of Rule 7 shall be included in the seniority list. Thus, according to the said notification, on the occurrence of substantive vacancies, firstly, persons holding the Junior Diploma Course in any particular year should be made substantive, followed by persons selected by the Commission during that very year, and this process should continue from 1961 to 1968. THEreafter, in the year 1969, firstly, persons passing the Junior Diploma Course should be made permanent, followed by persons selected by the Commission and lastly, persons who were appointed temporarily prior to September 1, 1968 and who were made permanent on account of the amendment of proviso (2) (i) of rule 7, by the notification dated March 19, 1969 should be considered in order of seniority.